Your Bengals fan photos
Montgomery Most Wanted
Gary Leitzell sworn into office
Schools head back to ballot for bond
Beavercreek school board decides to try again to seek construction fund.
> Comment on this
Tuesday, November 20, 2007
BEAVERCREEK — Citing rising construction costs and school overcrowding, school board members voted Monday to put a bond request for construction money back before voters in March.
The request will be similar to the $89.3 million bond request voters turned down Nov. 6 with 7,286 voting against and 6,718 in favor, according to unofficial results from the Greene and Montgomery county election boards. The money will build three schools and renovate existing buildings in the growing district.
Extras
Beavercreek added 1,000 students in the past five years and expects 800 to 2,500 more in the next decade.
Peg Arnold, board president, said putting the issue back before voters as soon as possible is the board's "civic responsibility."
"There is nothing else we can do," Arnold said. "If we don't get it passed we'll end up spending more money out of the general fund for trailers or leased space or something. We have to put these kids somewhere."
A committee of school officials and residents worked two years on the plan to build schools to help ease overcrowding, she said.
"It's not a Cadillac. I'm not even sure it's a Chevy," Arnold said of the plan.
Monday's vote starts the process of putting the request on the March ballot by asking the Greene County auditor to calculate the exact cost of the issue. On Dec. 10, the board will vote officially to put the request before voters.
Comments
By Tax-Frayed
December 4, 2007 1:16 PM | Link to this
What did they not understand about “NO” in November? I would vote NO for this irresponsible panic-response EVERY TIME, even if they put it on the ballot every month! Put the kids out on the streets with signs again, I don’t care. No. No. No.! It would be cheaper for me to drive my kids to school than put up with this levy. Is there a way to vote No for the next three or four pathetic attempts and get it over with? I agree with an earlier post: Sell the stupid golf course!
By Oh Pa-lease!
December 4, 2007 1:09 PM | Link to this
One: At the middle school town hall meeting, the board confirmed that Beavercreek actually ABSORBED the entire Xenia school district during the tornado crisis. The use of A & B scheduling CAN be done. Beavercreek has DONE it before. Two: Why a new middle school when the one on the south side of I675 is already under-populated? Re-district and distribute the overcrowding that way. Three: They mentioned the environmental impact fee at the same town hall meeting? We should charge it!
By tired of taxes
November 24, 2007 3:42 PM | Link to this
I agree with those who have said that the new housing developers should have to pay an impact fee or tax on their developments. It’s their fault we have this problem in the first place. I also think that students/parents should have to pay for extra-curriculars (band, sports, clubs, etc.). I don’t see that as part of a basic education.
By Dick nystrom
November 23, 2007 5:54 AM | Link to this
We expect school board members to follow guidance of the community and not to build a legacy which is exactly what the majority of the board members want to do. They want to see their names in light on these buildings and I have it on good info that at least one of the new proposed buildings will have a school board members name as a legacy. Arnolds comments in the DDN also reflect negatively on her, if all she has after all the $$ they have spent is a chevy…maybe she needs a dose of reality.
By SupportOurSchools
November 22, 2007 10:16 PM | Link to this
To enough is enough - Federal law requires school districts to educate identified special needs kids from age 3 to 22. Every district. No choice is involved. Your district is currently using over 98 - that’s right, 98 classrooms to meet the law and its requirements. Those rooms aren’t available for other kids. And the number of people in them is set by law. If you don’t like it, don’t blame the school. Talk to your legislators in DC. They don’t send money for their laws. You pay.
By Dani
November 22, 2007 10:09 AM | Link to this
WOW! A great place like Beavercreek harbors this much venom at people they elected who are bringing in $1500 a year for this huge job? Must you throw tomatos at them for so little? What exactly is the benefit the school board gets when an issue passes? Don’t you think it helps to have some facts on hand before you vote? This msg board is FULL of erroneous info. City tax and Impact fees go to the city. School funding is so confusing even lawyers get confused. How about some ‘Creek pride???
By Chucky rowland (DUI KING)
November 21, 2007 10:08 PM | Link to this
dear school employee…you are absolutely right..it is time to start making sacrifices.Just today, Peg Arnold told me that she would stop eating out every night and cut back to 6 nights. I am making a commitment to stop representing coaches that molest students even if they were volunteer.Also, if I catch u posting here again without my express permission I will terminate and sue you. I am the only king of this board. Understand?Yep, you all make sacrifices while we sit back fat, dumb and happy
By give me a break
November 21, 2007 9:53 PM | Link to this
to the beavercreek school employee. You are wrong on many accounts. Year over year over year the schools keep coming at us with an open hand. We are just tired of being told what bad citizens we are because we want to hold on to our money that we work so hard to make. To many of us the economy has hurt us but no one in government seems to care. I dont see the high rollers working at the castle who drive high priced cars stepping up to take a cut in pay to help the cause. Get off your soapbox
By Beavercreek School Employee
November 20, 2007 11:32 PM | Link to this
I can tell that there are many people in the community that are still not educated on school funding and the school system itself. Sometimes, people have to make sacrifices (such as giving up cable t.v., buying dvd’s, eating out all the time, etc.) to help provide for our youth who will be leading us in the future. Many people are selfish and only think about how it affects them when they should be thinking about the children and not how big or expensive of a house they can buy.
By enough is enough
November 20, 2007 6:31 PM | Link to this
OH and dont forget, if this levy passes, you can darn well expect an operating levy on its heels to help fund the operations of these new buildings.
Also why does the school board feel compelled to build a PRE SCHOOL building? They claim the state mandates preschool. When my kids were growing up I had to send them to preschool and PAY for that piece. This is not the fricking Salvation Army. Let them pay like we did and Screw the building.
By enough is enough
November 20, 2007 6:18 PM | Link to this
with the economy being such as it is and property values going down, do you think the city / county would cut our property taxes. the answer to that is no. but our elected officials feel compelled to continue to put their hands in our pockets and rob us dry with these levies. it is time for the second coming of the boston tea party.
By baker's dozen
November 20, 2007 5:34 PM | Link to this
Shut your pie holes. I wanted an earnings tax. It was the liquor tax I didnt want. I cant afford it. Matter of fact I couldnt afford my property taxes for awhile until I took a loan out to pay em. Like I always say, read my lips “No mor tuxes, ocifer Im not drunkd, I got some lowe blud ssshhurggurr. Im not as think as you drunk I am.”
By enough is enough
November 20, 2007 4:56 PM | Link to this
now that part of the problem is gone in city hall now it is time to vote out elmer fudd (hadley) and the others. also time to get rid of the township trustees who cant handle their budget and roll over and play dead to developers. get rid of the career politicians like that old bat who has been there forever and the that pompous bob glaser. we need leaders at all levers in the city and twp who look at the long term issues not their personal issues. lastly SELL THE GOLF COURSE!!!!!!!!
By Chucky rowland
November 20, 2007 4:56 PM | Link to this
Ok,enough is enough….er..is enough.I will take your case and sue the school board on your behalf. I am sick and fed up with the levies..it is taking away from my DUI business. Kids aren’t drinking enough and my breathalyzer is only used when Peg comes over after the buffet and Cadillac jacks… Who cares if I am suing myself…at least I can pay my own bill. I am serious…I will sue all of you…I’ve only won one DUI case because the jury fell asleep but I am still honing my perry mason like skills
By enough is enough
November 20, 2007 4:51 PM | Link to this
finally. part of this problem is due to the city council and township council who dont have the nuggets to say no to further single family homes. time to vote these cronies out and vote those in who have a logical land use plan and know how to stand up to the sprawl that has been created. they spend more time arguing about the color of brick on business’ rather than look at the long term needs of this city.
By enough is enough
November 20, 2007 4:48 PM | Link to this
are there any attorneys out there who want to file the lawsuit to ban the levy’s based on the supreme court ruling. someone has to stand up to these ignorant jerks.
By chuck (DUI KING)Rowland
November 20, 2007 4:47 PM | Link to this
You are right…this board is scary. Also speaking of deadbeat parents, they make great DUI and pervert clients, especially if their kids go to Beavercreek. Could use another coach groping a cheerleader case..anyone know about one? Business is slow..I don’t care if you vote for me as much as I really want you to call me to defend you and your dirty scummy kids. Really whats a little underage drinking?? When the kids are sober they need 12 variations of gym class, OK? Are you with me.??? only $
By enough is enough
November 20, 2007 4:44 PM | Link to this
it is amazing to read all the comments on this blog. one person says all it is is another $120.00 per year. that and the fire levy, the career center, the greene county this and that it all adds up and when 63% of our tax $$ goes to beavercreek schools that is just outrageous. sounds like the scarecrow needs a brain.
By fenwah
November 20, 2007 2:04 PM | Link to this
Wow…scary comments on this board. The levy was defeated by a miniscule 500 votes. If we could get those dead-beat parents who have children in the school system that did not vote on this levy the first time, then this levy would pass easily. I believe the voter turnout for the levy was around 30%.
By WTF
November 20, 2007 12:22 PM | Link to this
I dont get it. Its always the school boards fault. They are elected and re elected all the time. If they are the problem why do we keep getting ones we cant trust? Why dont you cheapo non trusting parasites vote in someone that doesnt want the best for the kids and beavercreek. Oh yeah you tried a couple of years ago and they got bounced. KBA Pac disbanded due to lack of interest. Get a clue will ya?
By Linda
November 20, 2007 10:55 AM | Link to this
As to the trailers: My son was in a trailer for a year at Shaw School. It didn’t hurt him any. Perhaps we should put the School Board in the trailers and put the kids in the “Castle on Kemp Road!”
After a levy failed (circa 2000), busing was cut. Then the next levy passed. That fall, the teachers threatened to go on strike! MY husband and I will NEVER vote for another levy!
Fred, if you want to start a group against the levy, let me know!!
By Linda
November 20, 2007 10:54 AM | Link to this
As to the trailers: My son was in a trailer for a year at Shaw School. It didn’t hurt him any. Perhaps we should put the School Board in the trailers and put the kids in the “Castle on Kemp Road!”
After a levy failed (circa 2000), busing was cut. Then the next levy passed. That fall, the teachers threatened to go on strike! MY husband and I will NEVER vote for another levy!
Fred, if you want to start a group against the levy, let me know!!
By EJ
November 20, 2007 10:42 AM | Link to this
Curmudgeons, you disappoint me. I’m NOT happy that none of The Greene revenue is going to our schools, but that blame lies w/ city & county government, NOT the school board. The bang for the buck that the Beavercreek schools deliver is a HUGE bargain compared to other area districts—check out the millage rates of other area districts that earn EXCELLENT ratings from the state as compared to BCreek. Dayton’s growth is in high-brained industries. We need great schools & they need $$$!
By Big Ed
November 20, 2007 10:38 AM | Link to this
Typical of the hubris of the Beavercreek School board. We’re heading for a recession and they continue to insist that they need to allow for growth calculated several years ago when the economy was in good shape. Maybe they can put the kids in one of the dozens of empty retail establishments which blight the city of Beavercreek.
I voted no last time and will continue to vote no until the school board starts to listen to the community.
By Malibu Barbie
November 20, 2007 10:35 AM | Link to this
Ok, so I barely got re elected. But, I do have something going on in my Blonde Melon. According to the only source I use, Dave Baker, an earnings tax will never make it here. It’s got something to do with taking money out of someone’s check or collecting dues from a bill, or whatever, I dont really know but I’m not for it whatever it is. I’m all about schools, I attended Carousel Beauty College and graduated C*m Loud.
By jbroughton
November 20, 2007 10:31 AM | Link to this
You got to know when to hold em: know when to fold em,. Earnings tax is the only way to go. Vote this bond issue in and let the kids flourisch. Or we could have a texas hold em tournament, in which I would clearly win. Lame duck my eye. I will be around forever….
By RM25483
November 20, 2007 10:17 AM | Link to this
Keep in mind that ‘no city tax’ is a big selling point for Beavercreek. Perhaps starting one would slow growth, but it opens a door to an ever increasing slash to incomes. When picking an apartment, remember to include the ~$75/month income taxes that would have paid in Fairborn, etc. A better apartment is here for the same dollar simply because of the lack of income tax here. Beavercreek has relatively good schools, what they need isn’t more $, it’s better management of what is there.
By professora
November 20, 2007 10:16 AM | Link to this
From my understanding, there are at least 150 kids who are homeschooled in the Beavercreek school district. Add to that the children who attend private schools in the area and one might come to the conclusion that the schools are actually OVERFUNDED. All of those parents who choose not to send their kids to the BC schools are assuming the expense of their childrens education, therefore, leaving an excess in the school coffers. Perhaps we should ask how all that EXTRA TAX MONEY is being used.
By RM25483
November 20, 2007 10:10 AM | Link to this
Renters do pay into the property taxes. Every time the property tax goes up, the rent goes up. The leasing agents / owners make the actual ‘tax payment’ instead of the renters, it’s indirect. I do not know where so many of you got the idea otherwise. The majority of the school money comes from property taxes across all of Ohio ( unconstitutionally, by the way ); city tax will only help a little, but it opens a door to hurt incomes more than it helps schools. Once there is a small tax…
By Fredd
November 20, 2007 9:47 AM | Link to this
Our school board will spend big bucks to promote this levy with bulletins and street signs up to March. The DDN won’t allow another blog like this anytime soon, because of pressure from politicos and Homebuilder Associates. How does John Q. Public organize a countermeasure? Is the “Keep Beavercreek Affordable PAC” still open?
By sally
November 20, 2007 9:32 AM | Link to this
Vote NO,NO,NO. Can’t they get the point the first time? The people of Beavercreek are sick and tired of this issue being on the ballot every time we turn around.Those of us that have lived in Beavercreek for many years have already “paid our dues” to the schools with tax increases every other year. Maybe the school board should get “creative” and find another way to fund this instead of relying on homeowners.Make the families that are moving in pay more tax up front or have the builders donate
By Fred
November 20, 2007 9:11 AM | Link to this
No, No, No, No, No
What part of no did the school board not understand. Beavercreek has allowed way too much growth, overtaxed our water system, caused crowding in our schools, our streets are taxed because traffic is up significantly - and the developers all get a free ride.
NO!
By Tom
November 20, 2007 9:10 AM | Link to this
Dave is correct about the “impact fees”. I think the NO vote last time was a message to the developers. Beavercreek has grown way too fast. The property tax in this area is already way too high, but adding an income tax on top of that is just unreasonable. Seems to me the Beavercreek school superintendant is out of touch. He needs to read this blog.
By david
November 20, 2007 8:52 AM | Link to this
On fenwah comment. Cut it out……..if you want to give your money to the schools then write the check. But stay out of our pocketbook because we are in a better position and more capable that anyone else (government included) to decide how our money is spent. Levies are nothing more than legalized robbery. They are no different than a home invasion or someone sticking a gun in your ribs and saying “hand it over”.
By daffodilly
November 20, 2007 8:41 AM | Link to this
I voted no in November and I will vote no in March. Save the money it takes to campaign for these levies and use it for the schools.
By stingers
November 20, 2007 8:33 AM | Link to this
One of criteria we had when decided to live where we live was “no local tax”. So, we are not in favor of a local tax. All taxes and levies, whether federal, state, local or schools need to head south…..meaning less of the government stealing your money. The total tax burden in Ohio is 5th in the nation according to AARP (must be so when you live in a state that allows you to pay property taxes in two or more installments). This is nothing to brag about…..all taxes are to high.
By Michael R.
November 20, 2007 8:24 AM | Link to this
The school board will once again get the levy passed because they will start their scare tactics of stopping bus service for the high school and ending sports activities.Don’t fall for this again voters,vote NO!
By fenwah
November 20, 2007 8:23 AM | Link to this
Wow…the naysayers are out and about early this morning. We are talking about $120 a year or so per $100k of house. This is a small amount of money to fork over to build those new schools needed to to compensate for future growth and to fix up the existing schools. If you vote “No” again, they have no choice but to put it on the ballot again. By putting the problem off, construction costs will only continue to rise and the amount of money requested will continue to increase.
By bob
November 20, 2007 8:19 AM | Link to this
A city income tax will do nothing to fund the schools…
By mike
November 20, 2007 8:16 AM | Link to this
BEAVERCREEK WAKE UP CITYTAX!! CITYTAX !! CITYTAX!!
By freak me
November 20, 2007 8:14 AM | Link to this
AH what?!?!? Maybe they haven’t heard we are heading toward a recession. Maybe when my home value increases or the dollar rises I will think about it. But until then the school will need to do like the rest of Beavercreek residents and live within their means. If I have to cut back because of rising gas prices and a shrinking check so should they. Maybe they could raise some money by selling the albatross they call the board of education building, oh wait do they even own that yet?
By beltram
November 20, 2007 8:11 AM | Link to this
As we understand it and as a reminder…..if the $89.3 million bond issue passes, it will be followed by another levy to provide money to operate what was built with the $89.3 million. The school board cannot be satisfied and if the State of Ohio says something is needed, then they can fund it. If Ohio is unwilling to fund it, they can just keep there mouths shut. This area of Ohio has more tax funds being sent out than is coming in. We are unwilling to crutch-up other areas of Ohio anymore.
By french
November 20, 2007 7:59 AM | Link to this
The last time I checked, 62% of my property taxes were for schools. The county auditor has advised that the value of my property has increased $90 thousand……even though everything is the same this year as last year. So, at a time when property values and sales are down, the auditor says value is up. This means I will pay more for schools even without a bond levy. The levy passing will just increase it even more. We will not vote ourselves a tax increase….so the answer in Mar 08 is NO.
By JIM
November 20, 2007 7:54 AM | Link to this
WHAT NEEDS TO BE DONE IS A CITY INCOME TAX!! SEEMS LIKE THIS ALWAYS SEEMS TO FALL ON DEAF EAR’S.THIS WOULD TAX EVERYONE IN THE CITY SO RENTER’S AN EVERYONE WOULD BE AFFECTED.ALSO WHEN THE DISTRICT IS GOING TO BUY LAND IT SHOULD FIRST ASK THE VOTER’S.
By JIM
November 20, 2007 7:53 AM | Link to this
WHAT NEEDS TO BE DONE IS A CITY INCOME TAX!! SEEMS LIKE THIS ALWAYS SEEMS TO FALL ON DEAF EAR’S.THIS WOULD TAX EVERYONE IN THE CITY SO RENTER’S AN EVERYONE WOULD BE AFFECTED.ALSO WHEN THE DISTRICT IS GOING TO BUY LAND IT SHOULD FIRST ASK THE VOTER’S.
By french
November 20, 2007 7:48 AM | Link to this
The school board and Ohio need to comprehend that they are not on the cutting edge of anything when it comes to funding schools. The same issues are valid in every school system throughout the country. What needs to be examined is how other areas address the issue fairly. Suggest a field trip to Houston County Georgia. School construction is funded by bonds that add a penney to the sales tax for five years. Everyone gets to pay whenever they buy something….not just property owners.
By david
November 20, 2007 7:40 AM | Link to this
Within the past 2 weeks, I read that the State of Ohio sold the $20 to $25 billion cigarette lawsuit settlement for $5 billion. Guess they wanted the $5 billion right now rather than the $20 to $25 billion over 20 to 25 years. So where is the Beavercreek portion of the $5 billion and what lessening impact does it have on $89.3 million that the school board royals wants?
By Dave
November 20, 2007 7:35 AM | Link to this
Let’s see, school enrollment increases because of new residential building. Developers make money from these projects. Residents lose money paying for infrastructure needed by new development. Maybe, just spiffballing here, maybe the developers should kick in an impact fee to the schools for each unit added. You build it, they come, you pay for it. Google: Florida impact fees schools, for additional info.
By chuckie rowlans
November 20, 2007 7:26 AM | Link to this
Oh yeah, did I mention that I have xeniaDUI.com/BeavercreekDUI.com/KemproadDUI.com/FairbornDUI.com…oh don’t forget that I also defend adults accused of sexual misconduct against our school kids…I have added fairbornMOLESTORS.com. This school board is a great gig….but lets keep this between us OK???? Maybe next skool board meeting we wont have it golden corral. Peg got sidetracked with the buffet and confused on which place was overcrowded, the schools or the buffet…hate when that happens.
By Charlie Rowland/skool board
November 20, 2007 7:17 AM | Link to this
who cares about the levy..I am on the school board to get my name out I can defend the students against the terrible police arresting them for DUI and underage consumption. This is the real problem, not overcrowding, underage drinking. If they had more beer parties half of the high school students wouldn’t show up the next day and the overcrowding would be solved. It is a win win for me. Oh yeah, did I mention that I have xeniaDUI.com/BeavercreekDUI.com/KemproadDUI.com/FairbornDUI.com…oh don
By Amy
November 20, 2007 6:59 AM | Link to this
If the board had a good plan for new schools, I would vote for it. Ask them why they said no to the three plans the community group came up with and went with their own (bad) plan. Oh never mind, you won’t get a straight answer out of that group. The schools are becoming more overcrowded, but we don’t need a middle school out in the middle of nowhere. We don’t need a kindergarten city. We really don’t need an uncovered walkway making the high school and Ferguson one school.
By stingers
November 20, 2007 6:52 AM | Link to this
Has anyone done the math? It works out to over $54 thousand per head (800 + 2500 divided by 2 equals 1650 average, then divide $89.3 million by 1650,…..the result is $54121.21). I suspect that $54 thousand is more that the majority of people affected by this attempted robbery make in a year. The school board and the school system has turned into a business where educator types are trying to convince the voters that we should assure there continued financial well being.
By stingers
November 20, 2007 6:40 AM | Link to this
Here we go again. The school board has never seen a levy they didn’t like. It should be law that if a levy fails it cannot be put before the voters again until 3 to 5 years have passed. In this area we are confronted with more levy issues than people to vote for. Taxing property owners only is not fair…….people who rent should also have to contribute to paying for the excess desires of the school board. The answer to this in March 08 will be the same for this family……..NO, NO and NO
By Fred
November 20, 2007 6:39 AM | Link to this
This was a well funded and well promoted campaign that failed and will fail again. I believe people recognize that a healthy school district improves value and sells more homes. However, predatory overbuilding has driven cost of service to a level which has become a severe drag on local home value through added taxes. Vote no and let the current system collapse, our schools will be just fine, you won’t lose a dime in property value by defeating this levy.
By Chuck
November 20, 2007 6:34 AM | Link to this
I have lived in Beavercreek since 1999. I don’t think I have seen any election day pass without a levy about the schools on it. On top of that the school system itself is very disappointing. I will ever vote “NO” on these levies, as well as the ever present Police levies.
By Dwight
November 20, 2007 4:38 AM | Link to this
I find it rather interesting that when the electorate votes “No” on a levy, the School Board never seems to hesitate to put the matter up for a re-vote. Why do they never give us the same courtesy when there is a rather thin “Yes” vote. It seems as if “NO” never means “No”, however a single “Yes” vote always means “Yes”. Why bother even holding a vote if the only result that the powers to be will ever permanently accept is “Yes”. The whole process has become an insult and fraud.
By Jeff
November 20, 2007 3:09 AM | Link to this
You are truly a sucker if you fall for this school boards propaganda. Same old “we need more money”. As for me…they’ve went to this well too many times and its dry. Rent the trailers and take a pay cut if you really want to help. Remember the “Castle on Kemp” and “Lets cut the bus transportation for high school kids” from the past??? I do and I and my family will vote NO!!!!